October 11, 2009

Is it that they're doing it at all? Because they are not doing it well! Was there any new or interesting observation in this? The writing is terribly dull. I won't listen again to get the quote exactly right, but — after saying he got the Nobel Prize for not being George Bush — he says something like "I've only not been George Bush for 9 months." But he's not a 9-month-old and he's never been George Bush. Couldn't you polish that into something like "I've only been President Not George Bush for 9 months"?

And could SNL hire somebody who can actually impersonate Barack Obama? Obama has so many physical and vocal mannerisms. It could be hilarious. And it's not like when Chevy Chase played Gerald Ford without any attempt at seeming like Ford, because Chevy Chase had a very appealing and funny personal style of his own and imitating without imitating was itself ridiculous. Fred Armisen isn't doing anything.

"Saturday Night Live" is boring and lame. Giving them credit for willingness to make fun of a liberal is like giving the Nobel Prize to Obama for not being Bush. Except much duller.

Imitation is not Fred's strong-suit. But the greater phenomenon is the "collective sigh of relief" that SNL has figured out some way to lampoon BO. phew!! Our political proclivities were painfully obvious until now.

And along those lines I found it interesting that the "not George Bush" line got more applause than laughs. Yes, that is why we like you!

Similarly, the lines about his economic advisors fell flat. What!? Did I miss something?

Yes they're getting credit simply for making fun of Obama. Its the ultimate modern comedic taboo apparently. They're sort of having the same problem the MSM is having though. Main Stream Comedy is loathe to poke fun at Obama, but the internet is awash in Obama jokes, and they're better and funnier than anything the cowards in the MSC are willing to even attempt.

SNL and Daily Show routinely savage Obama, so howIs "MSC" cowardly? This is how the game is played people-corporate media including Comedy Central and NBC- whom I would call mainstream, have an interest in keeping our 2 party system look like a never ending horserace. This way we can keep betting on it and not get any real work done.

Could it be that the unfunny jokes and lame impersonation is intentional? They may be sending the message of...

"See? We tried! But there's no comedic material to be mined here. We know that and you should know that. He's our Ghandi. America should be a guffaw-free zone when it comes to such an historical figure."

You won't find an able or effective impersonation of The Won because an actor in Hollywood knows that while you can stand up for pedophile rapists and death row cop killers six days a week and twice on Sundays, there are some lines you just don't cross.

>>>SNL and Daily Show routinely savage Obama, so how Is "MSC" cowardly?<<<

The Daily Show does attack Obama regularly... for not being left wing enough. Granted! However can you please link me to any other SNL bit where Obama is the butt of the joke? Any other mainstream anything where Obama is the butt of the joke?

How lame is it that most comedians stated that it was sooo difficult to make fun of Obama and therefore they just didn't? At least I give SNL (which is has really never been that funny) kudos for at least trying.

What impact do you think this lack of satire towards Obama has on the youth? When I was a kid, Reagan, HW Bush and Carter were skewered relentlessly. I was a young Republican but loved the Phil Hartman Reagan and the Dana Carvey Bush.

I was at a public event the other day and the person speaking made mention of "being haunted" and I turned and cracked to a fellow winger, "the only thing that haunts me is a 2nd Obama term". In front of me at the time was a black, female high school student. She turned around and gave me a look like I had threatened her parents with death.

I wanted to say, he ain't your president not to make fun of. He's our president to ridicule just as we've relentlessly ridiculed every previous leader.

Yea, I don't get how those writers keep their jobs. I think the average person could write better jokes. They sat around and convinced each other that was funny stuff. Most comedy writers could come up with better stuff right off the cuff.

The entire world seems to have decided that even mediocrity is a bar too high.

This guy does a really good impersonation of, uuh, Obama. I wouldn't say he's actually making fun of him though. It'd be nice to see his skill put together with writing by someone who doesn't consider the Obama presidency to be some kind of sacred cow.

What a quaint idea that you have to sit home and watch anything live these days. It's called the internet, you're on it.

I actually tried to watch an episode of Saturday night Live this last election season but I couldn't do it, even ffwding through most of it was too boring.

I did just watch that skit and every writer on it should be fired. As should Fred. I feel pretty confident a four year old could do a better/funnier impersonation. And "jokes" should get laughter not claps. If someone is clapping at your joke, it wasn't funny.

kristinintexas - that "alphacat" impersonation you posted was spot on. I love all of the "let me be clear" moments. Fred Armison should take notice. Obama's orations are predictable, and therefore, not hard to impersonate.

C'mon; it's hard for SNL or anyone to be funny in an attempted parody when Obama's acknowledgement of the award seems like one of those "The Onion" pieces & his actual narcissistic faux creative speeches in front of faux Palladian architecture seem like childish parodies which would be rejected on the Classic SNL.

it's rather lame that the ever so mockable Obama is "imitated" by simply having a slim black man claim to be Obama.

More of an accomplishment than you think -- step 1 is pretending that you are a slim black man.

Armisen's mother is Venezuelan and his father is German and Japanese, making Armisen SNL's second Asian-American cast member (after Rob Schneider, who is part Filipino) as well as the second Hispanic-American cast member (after Horatio Sanz, who is Chilean-American).

I declare SNL a de facto racist organisation. We have come so far in anointing a real Black Prince to rule over us, and then SNL pulls a stunt like this.The only question is what does FOX NEWS know about this deliberate red-neck racist hit piece and when did they know it? I predict that we will find that this all comes from Glenn Beck's brain waves that went thru the SNL studio's walls.

Jeremy...Not so fast. That comment was a satire on the attitude of the Left wing wackos to any criticism of the President. I personally believe Obama's skin color should be irrelevent. As one asshole to another, try to keep up, so we can drink a beer together in perfect harmony.

I watched a little of Weekend Update with my daughter. I didn't laugh and neither did she. I thought the parallels between Obama winning prematurely and the other prizes were okay, but I expect better.

The James Carville imitation was dreadful. I left when Scrooge McDuck came on (shudder)

Like MM -- I watched a little of the Weekend Update. Yeah, they did a skit about the news event of the Nobel Obama Prize. It struck me as an attempt to be funny, but with effort.

What was gratuitous and unfunny was the inclusion of a quote from Michael Steele -- with picture (was that racist?) and a snark about how he wouldn't have his job (Chairman of the RNC) except for Obama. Ha ha.

I'm sure it made the leftists smile with satisaction.

Only it wasn't correct.

While Barack Obama was mucking around in the Illinois State Senate (and where are his Senate notes?), Michael Steele had run, won, and was serving as Lt. Governor of Maryland. He even did some things of note while in that office.

Prior to that he was chairman of the Maryland Republican Party. (And Barack was doing what in 2002?)

Then there was the little matter during Steele's 2006 Senate run of the staff at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (Chairman -- Sen. Chuck Schumer) who fraudulently accessed Michael Steeles' credit information using his SSN and a created false email address in 2005. Steele lost, but after that became Chairman of GOPAC until he was elected RNC Chairman.

So the left jokers should save the patronizing for the man who did nothing, not the guy who did it without Barack's "help."

While Barack Obama was mucking around in the Illinois State Senate (and where are his Senate notes?), Michael Steele had run, won, and was serving as Lt. Governor of Maryland

while Michael Steele was mucking around as Lt. Governor of Maryland, Barack Obama had run, won, and was serving as United States Senator -- an office to which Steele aspired but could not win. Obama's won 5 of 6 elections (losing only to ex-Panther Bobby Rush) while Steele is one for two.

What was gratuitous and unfunny was the inclusion of a quote from Michael Steele -- with picture (was that racist?) and a snark about how he wouldn't have his job (Chairman of the RNC) except for Obama. Ha ha.

Steele was chosen for a reason similar to the reason Kennedy tapped LBJ to be his vice president: to shore up a weakness. It doesn't mean Steele is unqualified. But he almost certainly wouldn't have been picked if he was white, just like LBJ almost certainly wouldn't have been picked if he was from Massachusetts instead of Texas.

So, yes, Steele was chosen because of Obama. His race is a political asset the other candidates lacked.

It's about being willing to make joke's at Obama's expense at all. Yes, they are of sub-par quality, and always come from the perspective of deeming Obama to be insufficiently to the left, but it's progress, of a sort.

Certainly a welcome change from media institutions suffering from the Chris Matthews effect and being unable to countenance criticism of Obama, lest it interfere with their mission to help him succeed. One can't help but feel a bit of hope when a media institution indicates it may be something other than the official mouthpiece and propoganda mill for the Obama administration.

I haven't had time to read all of the comments, so excuse me if I appear to be plaigarizing somebody above. Please note that SNL is attacking (well, gently ribbing) Obama from the left. The kernel of truth upon which their humor (or the attempt at it) is based is that they are diappointed in his willingness to aggressively impose the leftist agenda they expected from him. If Gitmo were closed by now, if gays were serving openly in combat units, and if the precursor to single payer had been enacted already, you wouldn't be hearing a peep from SNL.

When something patently idiotic occurs, the court jester is duty-bound to comment upon it lest he lose his job.

The writers at SNL have to comment on things lest they look incompetent. I think they'd rather look slightly ideologically-suspect than incompetent. Their comments do come from the left, the bit last week at the open was a recitation of Obama's unfinished work from the perspective of a leftist (jab) to make right-wingers look foolish for saying the country is turning to the left (cross). Equal time, of a sort.

Seth Meyers' comment about the Nobel Peace Prize being a "call to action", after which he said, "The election was also supposed to be a call to action." is a shot from the left, not the right.

SNL is not half as funny as things I read on the internet about the Peace Prize just half a day after the announcement. They don't go after him with enthusiasm the way they did with Palin -- they write jokes, but their heart is not in it and it shows.

My point, which it seems you missed, was that Michael Steele had a public service personna before Barack Obama couldn't get into the DNC convention in LA.

He was elected / appointed the head of chair of the MD Republican Party in 2000.

Obama was an Illinois State Senator (loved the way he got Alice Palmer knocked off the primary ballot. Cool, huh!) while Steele ran for and won Lt. Governor of MD. That had nothing to do with Obama. Nor did any of his previous accomplishments.

(And where are Obama's State Senate records again?)

I believe I mentioned Steele lost in 2006.

My point was Steele existed as a Republican figure of note before Obama's presidency supposedly gave validation to every American with an African heritage. (Please adjust your bios, Clarence and Colin and Condoleezza.)

Winning the RNC chairmanship (which was close and actually included another black American) was a 'damned if you do damned if you don't' situation. If Steele won (having served as both an elected official and a state RNC chairman as well as holding a significant office with GOPAC) it was obviously because of his skin, if Katon Dawson from South Carolina (!!!) won it was because Republicans are racists who want to return to segregation.

I am not a Steele devotee, I just think the disinformation slipped in by SNL (Fey/"Palin" can see Russia from her porch. Ha ha.) is -- well -- deliberate -- but also done by people who actually seem to believe it's true.

As seen from the 'Palin' porch line -- many people then believed it. (Remember the post election interviews that were done? Oh. No. Wait. You probably missed those.)

Steele is well educated and has served in the trenches. On his record, he doesn't owe Obama anything.

And along those lines I found it interesting that the "not George Bush" line got more applause than laughs.

That's a well-known phenomenon among any sort of topical humor. Laughter is involuntary; applause isn't. So if an unfunny joke with a politically correct viewpoint is told, it gets applause so the audience can show that they share these politically correct viewpoints.

Gee, when SNL was making fun of Sarah Palin, the ratings were up and everyone laughed! Suddenly people who support Obama and his policies are upset because SNL is poking fun at our President? I don't get it.